Received: from mail-ob0-f189.google.com ([209.85.214.189]:60885) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1TgHEz-00031N-46; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:44 -0800 Received: by mail-ob0-f189.google.com with SMTP id xn12sf3909689obc.16 for ; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlegroups.com; s=20120806; h=x-beenthere:received-spf:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-google-group-id:list-post:list-help:list-archive:sender :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe:content-type; bh=Uy+XXRxg8EDFK11EzMn+76soFguLN8/jjGH0kKiZShg=; b=JktIWjrZYOCKzDMdRDBbSY1JyQYDqkyaPbfHMh31RXVD8FsrRnVi/HeF6XL5c707yh WiFH8EtYxAurADW2KiKLzLHZE1iq+nS/bRMlqgokOiKC2e4j/d2gwU6qrAgKjmetdhRf 9oQeFHWodjBLhj9K1iO/vhzkKe5Y+3PzY55VW6hxwiBK1cOPKQKoahJHNB7Y4Porcgxl DGq8tayecibIzPBi9A7x5mjsmr2AOzf4lSVo4mIxAXRcXJKNj5s5o6xvvHK4jbdRfFZN 5jen5d5L8ceCwFOE2Djyipa2YCpZpo2IbgA2Arucg4ZBPmzimnb7WJWyevqIR9arCZD+ 5JhA== Received: by 10.182.162.41 with SMTP id xx9mr192840obb.4.1354722622680; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:22 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: lojban@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.182.127.72 with SMTP id ne8ls125882obb.22.gmail; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.215.203 with SMTP id hf11mr13061201icb.17.1354722621370; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.42.215.203 with SMTP id hf11mr13061199icb.17.1354722621342; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-ob0-f181.google.com (mail-ob0-f181.google.com [209.85.214.181]) by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ul6si1398879igb.2.2012.12.05.07.50.21 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:21 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.181 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.214.181; Received: by mail-ob0-f181.google.com with SMTP id oi10so5079930obb.40 for ; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.32.97 with SMTP id h1mr14668397oei.13.1354722621008; Wed, 05 Dec 2012 07:50:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.60.178.237 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Dec 2012 07:50:20 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <33272af0-7522-44d7-a040-e451bf851595@googlegroups.com> <96205a36-c08f-4ebe-877e-112c22a5aefc@googlegroups.com> <5c52564a-f822-49b1-b8c9-745f53613b34@v9g2000yql.googlegroups.com> <50BF56A6.2010105@plasmatix.com> Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 08:50:20 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: [lojban] Re: [lojban-beginners] Re: Why no "about" brivla? From: Jonathan Jones To: lojban@googlegroups.com X-Original-Sender: eyeonus@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of eyeonus@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.181 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=eyeonus@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Reply-To: lojban@googlegroups.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list lojban@googlegroups.com; contact lojban+owners@googlegroups.com List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 1004133512417 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: Sender: lojban@googlegroups.com List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1f16c982b4804d01cf03e X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam_score: 0.0 X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_bar: / --e89a8fb1f16c982b4804d01cf03e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It took me a bit of searching to find this, but I did manage to find a discussion that corroborates my statement. The following post is by .xorxes.: Subject: [lojban-beginners] How versatile is "nu"? On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas = wrote: > On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 9:52 AM, tijlan wrote: > > Officially, the most generic/nonspecific of NU is "su'u"; but people > > seem to use "nu" more often for the purpose of general abstraction. > > The first thing I find odd about NU's is that they are called > "abstractors" instead of something more acurate like "subordinators". > What NU does is take a bridi and convert it into a selbri, so that it > will not be used as the main proposition but as a subordinate one. > It's true that properties and propositions are abstract objects (as > are numbers), but for me there is nothing abstract about events. > Something that can be seen cannot be very abstract. > > As for "su'u" as general subordinator, it was never used that way, > whatever its definition says. We can only speculate as to the reasons. > One reason could be that Loglan had the equivalents of nu/ka/ni but > nothing like "su'u", and people just went on with that. Also, "nu" and > "ka" being just one syllable, and with such distinct functions, there > wasn't much incentive to merge them. CLL lists "su'u" among the "minor > abstraction types", which already suggests it was never thought of as > the "general abstractor". > > > Personally, I wouldn't find it particularly odd if someone use "nu" > > for a terbri which the gimste defines as "du'u" or other specific > > types of abstraction. For example: > > > > mi jinvi lo du'u broda (I think that the proposition "broda" is true) > > mi jinvi lo nu broda (I think that the event "broda" is true) > > > > "jinvi"s x2 is officially to take "du'u". Is "nu" for such objects of > > mental activity / logical operation discouraged? If so, why? > > I suppose it's mainly tradition. One subordinator would probably be > all that is needed, but the nu/ka/du'u split is very entrenched. "ka" > is used for incomplete propositions, where you need to keep one (and > in a couple of cases more than one) argument slot open. "du'u" is used > mainly with propositional attitude predicates. It's a relatively short > list, maybe twenty or so gismu. In most other cases you can use "nu". > > Notice that the choice between nu/ka/du'u is dictated by the outer > bridi, the one that contains this one as an argument, whereas the > choice between the four types of nu: za'i/pu'u/zu'o/mu'e is dictated > by the subordinate bridi itself. > > mu'o mi'e xorxes > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jonathan Jones wrote: > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:13 AM, selpa'i wrote: > >> la'o gy. Jonathan Jones .gy cu cusku di'e >> >> Hey, I'm just telling you how it is. I'm not saying that {nu} should be >>> the default, it just happens to be that it IS. >>> >> >> No, it's not. You're wrong. Why can't you accept that even after several >> people have shown you that you're wrong? You're providing the beginners >> that this list is dedicated to with misinformation. >> >> {nu} is not the default, so it's *not* always right. You can't djuno a >> nu, nor can you zenba a nu. >> > > As I said, I'm not saying that I agree with it, nor am I saying I think > it's correct. What I AM saying is that that is how it is, regardless of > whether it makes sense, regardless of what the definitions of the various > NU are, and regardless of whether it should be something else. > > That said, I do happen to agree with you. That, however, is not my point. > This is not my opinion, it is the current state of the language. And I am > not the first nor the last to find things about this language that could = - > or indeed, should- be changed for the better. > > >> mu'o mi'e la selpa'i >> >> -- >> pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo je nai zo lejbo >> >> do=E1=BB=8B m=C3=A8lbi mlen=C3=AC'u >> .i do c=C3=A0tlu ki'u >> ma fe la x=C3=A0mpre =C5=ADu >> .i do t=C3=ACnsa c=C3=A0rmi >> gi je s=C3=ACrji se t=C3=A0rmi >> .i ta=E1=BB=8B bo da'i pu c=C3=ACtka lo gr=C3=A0na ku >> >> >> . >> >> >> >> . >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Group= s >> "Lojban Beginners" group. >> To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.**com= >> . >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> lojban-beginners+unsubscribe@**googlegroups.com >> . >> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/** >> group/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den >> . >> >> > > > -- > mu'o mi'e .aionys. > > .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o > (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) > > --=20 mu'o mi'e .aionys. .i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o (Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. :D ) --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group. To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den. --e89a8fb1f16c982b4804d01cf03e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It took me a bit of searching to find this, but I did manage to find a disc= ussion that corroborates my statement. The following post is by .xorxes.:
Subject: [lojban-beginners] How versatile is "nu"?

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Jorge Llamb=C3=ADas <= jjllambias@gmail.= com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 13, 2010= at 9:52 AM, tijlan <jbotijlan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Officially, the most generic/nonspecific of NU is "s= u'u"; but people
> seem to use "nu" more often for the purpose of = general abstraction.

The first thing I find odd about NU's is that they a= re called
"abstractors" instead of something more acurate like "subord= inators".
What NU does is take a bridi and convert it into a selbri, so = that it
will not be used as the main proposition but as a subordinate one.
It's true that properties and propositions are abstract ob= jects (as
are numbers), but for me there is nothing abstract about event= s.
Something that can be seen cannot be very abstract.

As for "su'u" as general subordinator, it was never used that= way,
whatever its definition says. We can only speculate as to the reasons.
One reason could be that Loglan had the equivalents of nu/ka/n= i but
nothing like "su'u", and people just went on with that. Also,= "nu" and
"ka" being just one syllable, and with such distinct functions, t= here
wasn't much incentive to merge them. CLL lists "su'u" amo= ng the "minor
abstraction types", which already suggests it was never t= hought of as
the "general abstractor".

> Personally, I wouldn't find it particularly odd if someone use &qu= ot;nu"
> for a terbri which the gimste defines as "du'u" or other= specific
> types of abstraction. For example:
>
> =C2=A0mi jinvi lo du'u broda (I think that the proposition "b= roda" is true)
> =C2=A0mi jinvi lo nu broda (I think that the event "= broda" is true)
>
> "jinvi"s x2 is officially to take "du'u". Is &= quot;nu" for such objects of
> mental activity / logical operation discouraged? If so, why?

I suppose it's mainly tradition. One subordinator would probably = be
all that is needed, but the nu/ka/du'u split is very entre= nched. "ka"
is used for incomplete propositions, where you need to keep one (and
in a couple of cases more than one) argument slot open. "du'u"= ; is used
mainly with propositional attitude predicates. It's a relatively short<= br> list, maybe twenty or so gismu. In most other cases you can use "nu".

Notice that the choice between nu/ka/du'u is dictated by t= he outer
bridi, the one that contains this one as an argument, whereas the
choice between the four types of nu: za'i/pu'u/zu'= o/mu'e is dictated
by the subordinate bridi itself.

mu'o mi'e xorxes

On = Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Jonathan Jones <eyeonus@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 7:13 AM, selpa'i= <m3o@plasmatix.com> wrote:
Hey, I'm just telling you how it is. I'm not saying that {nu} shoul= d be
the default, it just happens to be that it IS.

No, it's not. You're wrong. Why can't you accept that even afte= r several people have shown you that you're wrong? You're providing= the beginners that this list is dedicated to with misinformation.

{nu} is not the default, so it's *not* always right. You can't djun= o a nu, nor can you zenba a nu.

As I said, I= 'm not saying that I agree with it, nor am I saying I think it's co= rrect. What I AM saying is that that is how it is, regardless of whether it= makes sense, regardless of what the definitions of the various NU are, and= regardless of whether it should be something else.

That said, I do happen to agree with you. That, however, is not my poin= t. This is not my opinion, it is the current state of the language. And I a= m not the first nor the last to find things about this language that could = - or indeed, should- be changed for the better.
=C2=A0
mu'o mi'e la selpa'i

--
pilno zo le xu .i lo dei bangu cu se cmene zo lojbo je nai zo lejbo

do=E1=BB=8B m=C3=A8lbi mlen=C3=AC'u
=C2=A0 =C2=A0.i do c=C3=A0tlu ki'u
ma fe la x=C3=A0mpre =C5=ADu
=C2=A0 =C2=A0.i do t=C3=ACnsa c=C3=A0rmi
gi je s=C3=ACrji se t=C3=A0rmi
=C2=A0 =C2=A0.i ta=E1=BB=8B bo da'i pu c=C3=ACtka lo gr=C3=A0na ku


.



.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;Lojban Beginners" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban-beginners@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban-beginners+un= subscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/<= u>group/lojban-beginners?hl=3Den.




--=
mu'o mi'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be d= enpa bu .i doi.luk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I = am your father. :D )




--
mu'o mi= 'e .aionys.

.i.e'ucai ko cmima lo pilno be denpa bu .i doi.l= uk. mi patfu do zo'o
(Come to the Dot Side! Luke, I am your father. = :D )

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= lojban" group.
To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to lojban+unsubscribe@googlegrou= ps.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/lojban= ?hl=3Den.
--e89a8fb1f16c982b4804d01cf03e--